Has any one tested the performance of the Tulip or AMD cards (or any other
network card) on any Linux version, with any CPU and any chip-set?
On Tue, 10 Apr 2001, Ofer Fryman wrote:
> Has any one tested the performance of the Tulip or AMD cards (or any other
> network card) on any Linux version, with any CPU and any chip-set?
Wow... that's a pretty broad question!
Yes I have had very good performance with the 'recent' tulip cards:
# lspci | grep DECchip
04:08.0 Ethernet controller: Digital Equipment Corporation DECchip 21142/43 (rev 41)
04:09.0 Ethernet controller: Digital Equipment Corporation DECchip 21142/43 (rev 41)
I have been able to tunnel about 186 Mbits/s on a P3Xeon/866 on any 2.4.{1,3}
kernel with two of the above cards (tulip driver). Note that this means
full duplex was on and the box was forwarding a total of 186 MBits of data
fron one NIC to another; actually it was 93 in each direction. Fast
routing (a la CONFIG_NET_FASTROUTE) was _not_ compiled into the kernel.
B.
--
WebSig: http://www.jukie.net/~bart/sig/
At what frame size?.
Thanks
Ofer
-----Original Message-----
From: Bart Trojanowski [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2001 4:30 PM
To: Ofer Fryman
Cc: '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'
Subject: Re: network cards (drivers) performance.
On Tue, 10 Apr 2001, Ofer Fryman wrote:
> Has any one tested the performance of the Tulip or AMD cards (or any other
> network card) on any Linux version, with any CPU and any chip-set?
Wow... that's a pretty broad question!
Yes I have had very good performance with the 'recent' tulip cards:
# lspci | grep DECchip
04:08.0 Ethernet controller: Digital Equipment Corporation DECchip 21142/43
(rev 41)
04:09.0 Ethernet controller: Digital Equipment Corporation DECchip 21142/43
(rev 41)
I have been able to tunnel about 186 Mbits/s on a P3Xeon/866 on any
2.4.{1,3}
kernel with two of the above cards (tulip driver). Note that this means
full duplex was on and the box was forwarding a total of 186 MBits of data
fron one NIC to another; actually it was 93 in each direction. Fast
routing (a la CONFIG_NET_FASTROUTE) was _not_ compiled into the kernel.
B.
--
WebSig: http://www.jukie.net/~bart/sig/
I used 1024 byte IP packet size (+12 bytes of Ethernet header) under 1500
MTU.
On Tue, 10 Apr 2001, Ofer Fryman wrote:
> At what frame size?.
>
> Thanks
> Ofer
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bart Trojanowski [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2001 4:30 PM
> To: Ofer Fryman
> Cc: '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'
> Subject: Re: network cards (drivers) performance.
>
>
> On Tue, 10 Apr 2001, Ofer Fryman wrote:
>
> > Has any one tested the performance of the Tulip or AMD cards (or any other
> > network card) on any Linux version, with any CPU and any chip-set?
>
> Wow... that's a pretty broad question!
>
> Yes I have had very good performance with the 'recent' tulip cards:
>
> # lspci | grep DECchip
> 04:08.0 Ethernet controller: Digital Equipment Corporation DECchip 21142/43
> (rev 41)
> 04:09.0 Ethernet controller: Digital Equipment Corporation DECchip 21142/43
> (rev 41)
>
> I have been able to tunnel about 186 Mbits/s on a P3Xeon/866 on any
> 2.4.{1,3}
> kernel with two of the above cards (tulip driver). Note that this means
> full duplex was on and the box was forwarding a total of 186 MBits of data
> fron one NIC to another; actually it was 93 in each direction. Fast
> routing (a la CONFIG_NET_FASTROUTE) was _not_ compiled into the kernel.
>
> B.
>
>
--
WebSig: http://www.jukie.net/~bart/sig/